+1 for removing all 14.1.x sections except for "14.1.3. Application
context lifecycle in Java SE".
Martin
Dne 24.6.2015 v 16:38 Romain Manni-Bucau napsal(a):
What happen if we say nothing? will not hurt later IMHO
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <
https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
<
https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
<
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<
http://www.tomitribe.com>
2015-06-24 16:28 GMT+02:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net <mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>:
Ok, but now in the chapter I have mention for Session Scope and
conversation Scope not being active in SE. Wouldn't it be strange to
have no mention of Request Scope or should we make a "temp hack"
saying that session scope is not active...
Le mer. 24 juin 2015 à 16:22, Jozef Hartinger <jharting(a)redhat.com
<mailto:jharting@redhat.com>> a écrit :
Depends on the spec mostly.
For @RequestScoped there is no natural notion of a request in
plain Java
SE. It's the user that needs to set the boundaries of a task
that the
@RequestScope is supposed to represent. This can be done using
Weld API
and hopefully using ContextControl soon. In the meantime I see
no point
in blurring this with magical contexts that try to guess what
the use wants.
That means that the context is not active by default but can be
controlled using the API.
On 06/24/2015 03:56 PM, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
> Jozef,
>
> Sorry my question wasn't precise enough. What will be the Request
> Context behavior in your implementation of EDR1 ?
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the
Apache License, Version 2 (
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other
ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual
property rights inherent in such information.